Where s the Temple?

[Keeping Alert]

People are getting excited about the signs in the skies of the tetrad 2014/2015 and as well as the perfect alignment of stars in 2017... but one thing is glaringly missing... where is the Temple? I heard it would take 3 years to build and dedicate the temple?

I know that all the items are in place (have they found the red heifer yet?) but even if all hell breaks lose today, it would be hard to imagine a temple ready by 2015 or 2016...

Thoughts?

[Ready1]

Hi KA

I have often wondered about the time frame when the temple will be built. My question is this. Does the temple have to be built prior to the beginning of the final seven years? If it were begun about the time of the beginning of the final period it would be finished by the midpoint, just in time for the abomination of desolation to stand up and dedicate it to himself.

Mat 24:15 When therefore ye shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoever readeth, let him understand,)

Obviously, his Jewish supporters would recognize the fallacy of what had happened and Jesus has some important advise for them...

Mat 24:16 Then let them who are in Judea flee to the mountains:
Mat 24:17 Let him who is on the house-top not come down to take any thing out of his house:
Mat 24:18 Neither let him who is in the field return back to take his clothes.

Just curious...

[mark s]

My understanding has been that with prefab construction, they can build very quickly, in a matter of 6 months or something like that. And it's my understanding that they have everything ready to assemble.

If in fact there is the fulfillment of Obadiah/Isaiah 17 before the 70th week, at the conclusion of that battle, Israel would be in a position of strength, and could rebuild without significant opposition prior to the 70th week, or going into the beginning of it, depending on how it all happens.

Love in Christ,
Mark

[Jericho]

I have often wondered about the time frame when the temple will be built. My question is this. Does the temple have to be built prior to the beginning of the final seven years?

Good point. Perhaps it's the seven year peace treaty that allows them to build it. Obviously something significant would have to happen beforehand to allow then to build on the temple mount.

[WilliamL]

For the the Holy Place that Jesus spoke of –- Mt 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the Abomination of Desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place…

he used the term topo hagio, literally “holy spot.” Jews in Jerusalem pray towards this holy spot daily. There is a room below the Temple Mount in “Solomon's Stables” that they figure is the closest they can come to it, since Jews are banned from the top of the Mount. Jews congregate there daily.
The point being: Jesus did not say the AD will stand in a Temple.

Neither does Daniel. Dan. 11:45 tells when the King of the North = the Son of Perdition “shall plant the tabernacles of his pavilion between the seas at the glorious holy mountain” = the Temple Mount. No temple is mentioned. This must be the AD because “at that time,” “a time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation” – the Great Trib – immediately follows. (For more about this period, go to
http://www.ourchurch.com//member/d/dumm ... -Witnesses.)

Daniel 12:11 speaks of, literally, “the removal of the continual/constant, and for a placement/setting up of an abomination of desolation...” No temple, altar, or sacrifice is mentioned here either, nor implied.

This leaves only 2 Thes. 2:2-4 –
“the day of Christ … [will not come] unless the apostasia comes first, and … the Son of Perdition … sits as a god in the naos of the God, showing himself that he is a god.” The term naos denotes the holy place/sanctuary within a temple/hieron. The naos typically was covered by a tent (the Mosaic Holy Tabernacle) or building. It was an exclusive place/spot within a temple/hieron.
Daniel prayed to God to “cause your face to shine on your sanctuary/miqdawsh/holy place which is desolate,” Dan. 9:17. That is, he acknowledged that the Holy Place/spot within Solomon's Temple – at that time, the temple having been destroyed so completely by the Babylonians that even its foundation had to be rebuilt – WAS STILL GOD'S HOLY PLACE on earth.

Even as it is today. Whether or not it is covered by the Dome of the Rock, the Dome of the Spirits/Tablets, or is elsewhere on the Temple Mount, it is still God's Holy Place. As the Jews knowingly testify by their “continual/constant” worship.

The reason why Dan. 9:24-27 is not mentioned here is fully explained at
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=69211

So, to answer your question “Where's the Temple?”, the answer is: you will have to wait for the Messiah to come build it. Solomon was authorized by God to build the first Temple, Zerubabbel the second, and “the BRANCH” of the line of David, i.e. the Messiah, the third. Jer. 23:5-6; Zech. 6:12, etc.

[1whowaits]

It does appear that a 3rd temple will be rebuilt on the temple mount as the AC sets himself up in that temple as 2 Thess 2 describes. Rev 11 describes what is a literal, physical temple with worshippers in it prior to Jesus' return. Although the specific term of temple is not used by Jesus in Matt 24, Jesus does refer to the holy place and Daniel, and Daniel does refer to the temple, sanctuary, etc in Dan 8, 9 and 11. The AC sets himself up as god in God's temple, from which he would likely rule, which would be consistent with Dan 11 and the royal tents (area of rule) set up by the AC at the holy mountain Jerusalem. The city that rules the world, the city the AC hates, the city of Rev 17, is most consistent with Jerusalem.

After Jesus, the 'Branch', returns it does appear that He rebuilds the 4th temple as Zech 6 describes.

The Jews believe that the one who might be the Messiah will help gather the people to Israel and will help rebuild the temple, and he will come around the time of Gog-Magog as described in Ezek 38-39. The 'covenant' that will be strengthened could be the Old Covenant (which was to be read before the people every 7 years according to Moses), which would have an association with sacrifice and offering.

An event like Gog-Magog could set the stage for Israel returning to the Old Covenant, rebuilding the temple as described in Ezek 40 +, and paving the way for a false messiah to set himself up in that temple.

While the temple could be rebuilt in a short period of time with modern building techniques, there must be ritual cleansing of the priests and temple items, and the temple mount. Ezek 39 describes a cleansing of the land of the dead bodies after Gog, apparently around the area of Jerusalem as they are buried in the valley between Jerusalem and the Jordan river, which could refer to a ritual cleansing of the Jerusalem area.

The cleansing initially occurs over 7 months, Joel 2 appears to describe Gog-Magog and points to the event occurring on the Day of Atonement, in the 6th month on the Hebrew calendar. 7 months later, starting at the 6th month, would end at the beginning of the 2nd month on the Hebrew calendar, the month Solomon began to build the first temple, the 2nd day of the 2nd month.

After being delivered by God at an event like Gog-magog, Israel could become quite observant of the Old Covenant and follow the OT traditions and dates.

[Exit40]

After Jesus, the 'Branch', returns it does appear that He rebuilds the 4th temple as Zech 6 describes.

Hi 1WW. Surely then, there is a Prophecy about the third Temple being destroyed ? Scripture is very clear about the first two, I am guessing it would be very clear about the third.

God Bless You

David

[1whowaits]

The scripture actually says very little about the destruction of the 2nd temple, other than Jesus' description of one stone not being upon another. The 'great city', alluded to as Jerusalem in Rev 11 (where their Lord was crucified), suffers significant destruction in Rev 16- 'the great city split into 3 parts...the cities of the nations collapsed..from the sky huge hailstones of about 100 lbs fell...' suggesting that most if not all structures are destroyed, including any temples. In Rev 17 the AC brings the city to ruin and burns her with fire, in Zech 14 the nations attack Jerusalem and take 1/2 into exile, Jesus later sets foot on the mount which would be inside the city of Jerusalem now, and splits the mountain which would cause a great earthquake, possibly that described in Rev16.

It is not clear whether the 3rd temple is completely rebuilt, but by the acts of the AC and God upon Jerusalem it is unlikely that what will be built will remain intact. After Jesus returns the topography of Jerusalem changes as described in Isa 2- 'the mountain of the Lord's temple will be established as chief among the mountains; it will be raised above the hills...many peoples will come and say, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob...'

[WilliamL]

1whowaits wrote:
After Jesus, the 'Branch', returns it does appear that He rebuilds the 4th temple as Zech 6 describes.

David: Hi 1WW. Surely then, there is a Prophecy about the third Temple being destroyed ? Scripture is very clear about the first two, I am guessing it would be very clear about the third.

David hits the mark. Show me any prophecy other than Daniel 9:24-27 -- which is not proven to be an End Time prophecy -- OT or NT, that says either
1) a 3rd Jerusalem Temple will be destroyed in the End Times, and/or 2) Jerusalem will be destroyed in the End Times.
BOTH must be destroyed, if Daniel 9:24-27 is an End Time prophecy.

2 Cor. 13:1, Mt. 18:16 " In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established." Show us the witnesses, if they exist.

1whowaits also wrote: Rev 11 describes what is a literal, physical temple with worshippers in it prior to Jesus' return.

The word for 'Temple' in Rev. is really naos, which means sanctuary. Rev. 11:19 tells us WHERE IT IS:
And the 'temple' (literally, naos) of God was opened in heaven...

EVERY SINGLE USE (16 of them) OF THE WORD NAOS IN THE BOOK OF REVELATION, MIS-TRANSLATED 'TEMPLE' IN MOST ENGLISH BIBLES, REFERS TO THE HEAVENLY SANCTUARY. Check them out for yourselves, brethren.

[1whowaits]

William, just carrying your view to its logical conclusion, so the outer court of the heavenly sanctuary will be trampled by the gentiles for a limited period of time? The outer court is not measured suggesting a negative thing, are the gentiles a bad thing in heaven, with all this trampling? Gentiles are only allowed in the outer part of the heavenly sanctuary for a limited period of time? Not good enough for the area of the Jews in the heavenly sanctuary? I thought Jesus eliminated the separation between Jew and gentile, this continues in the heavenly sanctuary in your view?

And in 2 Thess 2, if God's temple is the heavenly sanctuary, the AC is able to eject God from His temple and then set himself up as god? How does the AC get into the heavenly sanctuary? How is it that he makes it through all the angels and sets himself over God in God's heavenly temple/sanctuary?

The Jews believe that the temple on earth is a reflection of the temple in heaven, similar terms could be used to describe structures that serve the same function, as to which temple is being referred to would be determined by the context of the passage, through deductive reasoning, not necessarily a direct statement. And it is clear that the temple described in Rev 11 and 2 Thess 2 is not the heavenly sanctuary.

I find it interesting that after the scripture repeatedly describes a sanctuary, holy place, and temple and gives it physical characteristics, that some try to find any explanation other than the most obvious, that a literal, physical temple will be rebuilt, and the AC will defile it and set himself up as god in it.

So the scripture must directly state something before it is true? There must be 2 witnesses? Show me 2 OT prophetic scriptures that directly state that Jesus will come twice. They must be there, Jesus stated that the Jews should have known the hour of their visitation, so it must be in the OT scripture. If then it is not stated directly in OT scripture that Jesus will come twice, does that mean it did not or will not happen?

If Jesus coming twice is not directly stated in OT scripture, could one arrive at that conclusion through deductive reasoning from scripture? Could deductive reasoning apply to scriptures that have future fulfillment? If in the past scripture has not directly stated what is now obviously true, could it be that there are future prophetic events that are not directly stated but can be arrived at through deductive reasoning and are just as true?

[shorttribber]

So the scripture must directly state something before it is true? There must be 2 witnesses? Show me 2 OT prophetic scriptures that directly state that Jesus will come twice. They must be there, Jesus stated that the Jews should have known the hour of their visitation, so it must be in the OT scripture. If then it is not stated directly in OT scripture that Jesus will come twice, does that mean it did not or will not happen?

Why is it important that the two witnesses to any truth be found in the Old Testament Only? I can find two there, in the old testament, but why is it important that they be found in the Old testament only?
The events of Christ's two Parousias in the Old testament can be found in many places, although not plainly proclaimed, since it was necessary by God's wisdom and doing to allow partial concealment and blindness of "Daniel's People".

But now, the witnesses of the Old AND the New are Very Plain and Very Clearly Revealed.

And in 2 Thess 2, if God's temple is the heavenly sanctuary, the AC is able to eject God from His temple and then set himself up as god? How does the AC get into the heavenly sanctuary? How is it that he makes it through all the angels and sets himself over God in God's heavenly temple/sanctuary?

The Spiritual/Heavenly Sanctuary of God is not an IN HEAVEN ONLY LOCATION 1WW, it is a Place and Realm That is Not of this Visible World. You can try to answer William by saying "William, just carrying your view to its logical conclusion". But you did not do that.
What you did was carry what he said to a very Strict and Rigid opinion of the Heavenly sanctuary of God.....as though it were a place with some kind of Literal Zip Code.

The Heavenly Realm is not as such, it is Another Dimension, Unseen and Eternal. Paul says we Have Come, to the New Jerusalem Now. In the Spirit, and in That Realm, we are Already Seated In Christ in THAT Heavenly PLACE.

Rev 11 describes what is a literal, physical temple with worshippers in it prior to Jesus' return.

I find it interesting that after the scripture repeatedly describes a sanctuary, holy place, and temple and gives it physical characteristics, that some try to find any explanation other than the most obvious, that a literal, physical temple will be rebuilt, and the AC will defile it and set himself up as god in it.

As Literal as the Scroll that John is told to Eat? Or as Literal as the Rod that John is Told to "Measure the People/Worshipers" with?

We will soon see I think, if there will be or will not be.
I'm convinced there will not be.....for a multitude of reasons I've mentioned during the course of many discussions.

[WilliamL]

So many questions, so little time...
1WW asks, ... the outer court of the heavenly sanctuary will be trampled by the gentiles for a limited period of time?

Answer: Rev. 11:2 in the Greek says "...the court outside of the naos/sanctuary cast out outside..." -- one gets the sense from the 3 outs that it is WAY away from the heavenly naos. It is either the Temple Mount on earth, or part of it, which the Gentiles do and have been treading underfoot for these many centuries, as Jesus foretold in Luke 21:24.

1WW: And in 2 Thess 2, if God's temple is the heavenly sanctuary, the AC is able to eject God from His temple and then set himself up as god? How does the AC get into the heavenly sanctuary?

Answer: 2 Thes 2 doesn't say this naos is in heaven, neither did William. Please don't presume what I don't say.

1WW: Show me 2 OT prophetic scriptures that directly state that Jesus will come twice.

Answer: Isaiah 53 and Daniel 9:26 say Messiah will come and be killed. Zech 14 and Mal. 4 say he will come and kick butt. To give but a couple examples of the two comings, there are many others, as you well know, or should.

Now please answer my questions: Show me any prophecy other than Daniel 9:24-27 -- which is not proven to be an End Time prophecy -- OT or NT, that says either
1) a 3rd Jerusalem Temple will be destroyed in the End Times, and/or 2) Jerusalem will be destroyed in the End Times.
BOTH must be destroyed, if Daniel 9:24-27 is an End Time prophecy.

[1whowaits]

ST, the 2 passages that describe Jesus coming twice would have to be found in the OT as by the time of the NT, His first coming would no longer be prophetic, He had already come. The scriptural description of Jesus' second coming is more clearly detailed in OT scripture, Joel 3, Zech 14 clearly describe what is consistent with armageddon, which is what the Jews were looking for. But it is well know that the first coming was not so clearly stated, it was difficult to see although it was possible if one 'reasoned' through certain scriptures. Looking at the book of Daniel one could arrive at the conclusion that there would be 2 comings of the messiah, but it is not stated directly, even now many have difficulty reasoning through these passages.

William indicated that if something was not directly stated in scripture, then it cannot be true, there must be '2 witnesses', 2 direct statements, which of course do not exist in the OT regarding 2 comings of the Messiah. As in the case of the first coming of Jesus and OT prophetic scripture, the answer is there, but it has to be reasoned through, which apparently is God's intent. It appears that He desires for us to work for our understanding of His prophecies, He is not spoon feeding us, He wants us to think and reason about His prophetic scripture, and ultimately about Him.

And i would disagree with your view of the heavenly sanctuary, there is a spiritual realm in which the spirit beings exist, inside and outside of God's dwelling place, which can be termed the heavenly realm. But the sanctuary refers to a specific place within the heavenly or spiritual realm, it is God's temple in heaven, described in Rev., the place of His throne.

So when one uses the term 'heavenly sanctuary', one is referring to God's temple, not the spirit world in general. And it is clear that Rev 11 and 2 Thess 2 are not describing God's temple in heaven, as i attempted to demonstrate previously through a logical argument, it is a literal, physical temple on earth.

[1whowaits]

William, the outer court was a definite part of the temple, it was not 'far off', so if the outer court in Rev 11 is part of the earthly temple, then so is the rest of the temple, and by your own statement then Naos is not necessarily a reference to God's temple in heaven, it can also refer to the temple on earth.

Also, how do you know that Isa 53 refers to the Messiah? There is no mention of Messiah in the passage, how could you arrive at that conclusion as it is not directly stated in this passage? And in Dan 9:26 the Anointed One could refer to the Messiah, but how did you determine from the passage what 'cut off' refers to? It is not directly stated, how do you know what it means?

Hey, thanks for proving my point!

I see you refer to yourself in the 3rd person in your answers, and you write in a certain style typical of a previous poster who went by a different name, what name did you go by before?

[shorttribber]

So when one uses the term 'heavenly sanctuary', one is referring to God's temple, not the spirit world in general. And it is clear that Rev 11 and 2 Thess 2 are not describing God's temple in heaven, as i attempted to demonstrate previously through a logical argument, it is a literal, physical temple on earth.

We, the saint's are the Literal Temple on earth, and as I've mentioned many times before, the word "IN", used in the passage you're referring to "so that he sits "IN" the temple of God" Can be as easily translated and understood as "Among", Among the saint's, in other words, as an Apostate or False Christian "Among" true saints.

So, the physical temple is still being built, just by different kinds of Stones than what you're expecting.

That's why the reformers could so easily understand the Roman Catholic Pope as having His Seat Among the true Saints.
Their concept was not at all wrong , and their studies unmatched by anyone today....bar none.
And they were right, because there is more than one Antichrist, there are many that have Gone Out.
The final one will follow the same pattern, and will do the same as before him, only in the Final or Ultimate Way.

like I said before.....we will probably know very soon.

[1whowaits]

ST, actually, while we are all collectively part of the body of Christ, we are each individually a temple of the Holy Spirit, God dwells within us- 'don't you know that you are God's temple, and that God's spirit lives in You?' 1 Cor 3. So there is 1 body of Christ but multiple temples, it is the indwelling that makes us a temple.

So it would appear that in 2 Thess 2, if the AC were among those indwelt by the Holy Spirit, he would be among God's temples, which is not what the passage indicates.

But it is the weight of evidence from scripture that makes the point, Rev 11 describes a literal, physical temple, 2 Thess 2 describes a temple that the AC is in, Jesus describes a holy place in which a literal event occurs and refers to Daniel, Daniel 8 describes a sanctuary that is literally taken over, Daniel 9 can be interpreted as referring to a temple which is defiled, Daniel 11 refers to a temple that is defiled and taken over.

The weight of scriptural evidence would point to a literal, physical temple being rebuilt (as it does not currently exist) which is then desecrated and taken over in the middle of a 7 year period, which means we have a long, hard trib in front of us, imo. I would agree that we will soon find out which way this will go.

[shorttribber]

ST, actually, while we are all collectively part of the body of Christ, we are each individually a temple of the Holy Spirit, God dwells within us- 'don't you know that you are God's temple, and that God's spirit lives in You?' 1 Cor 3. So there is 1 body of Christ but multiple temples, it is the indwelling that makes us a temple.

Multiple temples? This is not what is described in the plain text of scripture.

1Pet.2
4 To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,
5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Does the text say that we are all separate spiritual houses? Or is the "House of God" One, and of One Seed In Christ Undivided?

So it would appear that in 2 Thess 2, if the AC were among those indwelt by the Holy Spirit, he would be among God's temples, which is not what the passage indicates.

No, it indicates simply and Imposter, and an Apostate Among them. God, being omnipresent is In His Temple, his temple IS the Collective Body of saints. Yes he indwells us personally but also Collectively, As His "Household of Faith", his House, Made WITHOUT HANDS.

And the Imposter will sit as an Apostate AMONG the Collective body.

Rev 11 describes a literal, physical temple

Have you forgotten that he was on Patmos? all of what he saw was a Vision, do you think he went about Literally Measuring the Worshippers? Taking notice of there height, or waste size? This is meant to have a spiritual application, and not to be understood in the literal sense.
You do know do you not the word used for the Rod, the Measuring Rod is "Rule, Standard"...where the word Canon is formed? And that the RULE or STANDARD that will be used to MEASURE the Saints will be the TRUTH,WORD,CANON in the last days, During the Separation to come?

as I said....soon we will all learn the truth of the matter.

Daniel 9 can be interpreted as referring to a temple which is defiled

That's true, but what KIND is the question.

Daniel 8 describes a sanctuary that is literally taken over

That was history, Antiochus Epiphanies

Daniel 11 refers to a temple that is defiled and taken over.

This most likely describes the temple mount today and the Dome of the Rock.

The weight of scriptural evidence would point to a literal, physical temple being rebuilt (as it does not currently exist) which is then desecrated and taken over in the middle of a 7 year period, which means we have a long, hard trib in front of us, imo. I would agree that we will soon find out which way this will go.

We will then agree as to how much weight scripture holds for either opinion then soon also.

Bless ya !WW,
Isn't this wait and see stuff just drive'n ya nuts though....

[1whowaits]

ST, yes, Paul and Peter describe christians both as individual temples (your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit) and as individuals being built up into a temple. But considering all the other passages regarding the AC and the temple, 2 Thess 2 is most likely describing the AC as setting himself up 'in' God's temple, not setting himself among God's temple/temples, which does not follow (the AC sets himself up as God and proclaims himself over God while among those who are indwelt by God? That is not stated anywhere else in scripture, rather the AC wars against those indwelt by God) .

And Rev 11 states that the temple is to be measured and the worshippers to be counted, not measured, the worshippers are separate and described as such. Therefore the temple in Rev cannot be 'spiritualized', it is a literal, physical temple that can be measured literally, with worshippers in it who can be counted as individuals.

And yes, waiting can be difficult, the thought had been that events would progress quickly and it would be over in a relatively short period of time, but it appears that we will have to wait longer than anticipated. Which appears to be Jesus' message in Matt 24-25, it will be longer than we thought it would be, but we still will know the season. A day at a time, a day at a time.....

[shorttribber]

And Rev 11 states that the temple is to be measured and the worshippers to be counted, not measured, the worshippers are separate and described as such. Therefore the temple in Rev cannot be 'spiritualized', it is a literal, physical temple that can be measured literally, with worshippers in it who can be counted as individuals.

Rev 11
1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.

No mention of "Counting", I guess some modern versions mentions Counting then? Could that have been Added In to some Modern versions that you're using to Overcome the Difficulty that the Literal Interpretation I've previously mentioned presents? Yes, that is the case.

Therefore the temple in Rev cannot be 'spiritualized', it is a literal, physical temple that can be measured literally, with worshippers in it who can be counted as individuals.

I will not agree to words Added....to "Help" our understanding......Added words do not offer any proof to the text, they only destroy, alter or pervert the actual meaning of it.

better to Listen to Johns warning to those who Would Add or Take Away from the Text as Written, and Heed it.

[wkc]

Explain how rebuilding the temple and resuming animal sacrifice under the old covenant would NOT be an abomination in light of the new covenant with Christ.

[mark s]

Zechariah speaks of sacrifices after Jesus reigns upon the earth, therefore, sacrifices themselves are not an abomination per se. There were various sorts of sacrifices, not all for atonement of sin.

One thing to consider is that with the advent of the two witnesses, God will have His prophets in Israel again, and may give a new dispensational change.

Love in Christ,
Mark

[shorttribber]

There were various sorts of sacrifices, not all for atonement of sin.

What do you feel about one that Is described as Atonement for Sin in Ezekiel ?

[wkc]

Mark ...appreciate your reply but I'm referring to the current age before the Lord returns. In so far as a new dispensation, while I realize that God's thoughts and His ways are higher than mine, it just seems a bit contradictory given that Christ was given once. Hebrews seems to be quite clear on this matter.

There were sacrifices for peace and for guilt as well as sin offerings but Jesus fulfills both of those as well; there were "thank" offerings or the sacrifice of praise. I could see those being continued in the millennial reign but they were generally meal and incense offerings.

Nevertheless, this question is specifically, related to this age and the current unbelieving, old covenant Jews. Again, it strikes me as an offense, given that all of the aforementioned sacrifices and offerings were completely fulfilled in the sacrificial death of our Lord.

It is a question that specifically relates to traditional teachings that encompass the prophecies of Daniel and the assumption that a temple must be rebuilt in order for the abomination of desolation to be accomplished. It is a question that specifically relates to the "desolation that will continue to the end"; it relates to the prophecy of Jesus, "your house shall be left desolate". This means to me that either there will be no temple or that even if one is built by unbelieving Jews, God will not inhabit it.

My point is that there is no scriptural basis that I can find that supports the thesis or premise of a new temple that God will find pleasing or that His Presence will inhabit, since He gave His only begotten Son as a sacrifice once and for all for sin and that He now is the Bread of the Presence of a much better dwelling place and temple. This is especially clear in Hebrews but also clear in several instances in the old testament prophets as well.

Unconvinced that there is any evidence for this thesis. It just isn't there that I can find. But thank you for speaking up.

In Christ,

wkc

[1whowaits]

ST, the measuring of the temple in Rev may well be a reference to the measuring of the Ezek 40 temple, the Ezek temple is measured with a rod similar to what is described in Rev 11. As stated in Ezek 43, if Israel was ashamed of her sins and apparently repented of them, this was the plan of the temple to be built.

The Ezek temple appears to have both pre-millennial (the 'prince' offering sacrifices for his own sin) and millennial (the description in Ezek 47)aspects to it. This would appear to be the temple built after Gog-magog and prior to the AOD, and then built again during the millenium as described in Isa.

Isa 2 describes the temple in a millenial setting and Zech 14 describes sacrifices in a millenial setting, when all nations go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, Jesus.

Although sacrifices for sin are no longer relevant, apparently sacrifices for fellowship and worship are not an abomination as sacrifices continue during the millennium under Jesus. And it appears that God is honored by His temple and He desires it to be rebuilt, as stated in Zech 1, where again the 'measuring' is mentioned, possibly a reference to Ezekiel 40. And it appears that the dividing of Israel and Jerusalem, and the preventing of Israel from rebuilding the temple, brings God's wrath on the gentile nations, and He sends the 4 'craftsmen' (horsemen?).

[1whowaits]

wkc, i would agree that just because the Jewish people rebuild the temple it is not necessarily true that God will be pleased with what they build, or that He will send the Shekinah glory to the temple. From Ezek 43 and Rev 11 it appears that God instructs the temple mount to be holy, which is not the case in Rev 11, the outer court is given to the geentiles which would be in violation of the law of the temple. On that basis alone the temple would be unacceptable to God and He would not be part of it, which would then allow someone else to take it over.

The temple is a building constructed to honor God and focus worship on Him. God laid out the plans for the temple personally, and it appears that His purpose is to focus worship, on Himself and on His Son, primarily when Jesus returns and sets up the temple Himself as described in Zech 6.

God desires His temple to be rebuilt, but He also desires the worship to be focused on His Son, and the 2 only come together after Jesus returns. But that does not mean the Jewish people won't make an attempt to rebuild the temple and ultimately fail in pleasing God. They still don't understand that the Atonement for sin has been made once for all in Christ, but soon they will.

[sacredcowbasher]

wkc, i would agree that just because the Jewish people rebuild the temple it is not necessarily true that God will be pleased with what they build, or that He will send the Shekinah glory to the temple. From Ezek 43 and Rev 11 it appears that God instructs the temple mount to be holy, which is not the case in Rev 11, the outer court is given to the geentiles which would be in violation of the law of the temple. On that basis alone the temple would be unacceptable to God and He would not be part of it, which would then allow someone else to take it over.

The temple is a building constructed to honor God and focus worship on Him. God laid out the plans for the temple personally, and it appears that His purpose is to focus worship, on Himself and on His Son, primarily when Jesus returns and sets up the temple Himself as described in Zech 6.

God desires His temple to be rebuilt, but He also desires the worship to be focused on His Son, and the 2 only come together after Jesus returns. But that does not mean the Jewish people won't make an attempt to rebuild the temple and ultimately fail in pleasing God. They still don't understand that the Atonement for sin has been made once for all in Christ, but soon they will.

I've been following the thread and what you're saying here makes sense to me.

[wkc]

Thanks all. There is some scripture and I will have to look for it that implies that the temple will be rebuilt but under the direction of the Lord Jesus Christ himself which actually could occur @ the beginning of the millennial age and it will be for worship and sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving. If someone finds it before me, please post.

The "abomination of desolation" to me means without the temple "standing in the holy place" means to me standing on God's holy mountain, designated as such in many places by the building of alters without the temple.

This is a very important topic as it pertains to our understanding of eschatology of future events and it seems that we, Believers that is, have had a lot of confusion around it. I'm researching temple vs. tabernacle and it appears to be 2 distinct places. This appears in the old testament as well as in Revelation where, I believe, is unveiled as a heavenly abode.

I will look for the scriptures I referred to to support this thesis. Also note that in the description of the Ezekiel temple it appears that the Lord does not enter the temple place @ in that particular description. Will get the scripture for that as well.

Not trying to debate, but looking for open minded discussion and research on what the Lord might reveal. We are searching for agreement with one another in His name.

Abiding

wkc

[shorttribber]

The temple is a building constructed to honor God and focus worship on Him. God laid out the plans for the temple personally, and it appears that His purpose is to focus worship, on Himself and on His Son, primarily when Jesus returns and sets up the temple Himself as described in Zech 6.

Based on this following text...
Zech6
12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD:
13 Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.
14 And the crowns shall be to Helem, and to Tobijah, and to Jedaiah, and to Hen the son of Zephaniah, for a memorial in the temple of the LORD.
15 And they that are far off shall come and build in the temple of the LORD, and ye shall know that the LORD of hosts hath sent me unto you. And this shall come to pass, if ye will diligently obey the voice of the LORD your God.

It is very clear that Christ has been Building (With Living Stones) this temple for nearly 2,000 years....and we are "Laborers (WORKERS) Together" With Him in the "Building" of it.

Why is it so complicated to see the Spirit of this Prophecy?
The Testimony of Jesus is The Spirit of this Prophetic Doctrine (Testimony), the Spirit of this Prophetic Report(Testimony), the Spirit of this Prophetic News(Testimony).

because of these words, "he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne"?

If that part is so very complicated to perceive the Spirit and meaning of, I will add this Exposition from another thread then.....
................................................................................................................................................
It has been said, and the idea defended that where the Greek word "Erchomai" (strongs 2064) is used, that That Alone Proves it Must be understood in the Literal Sense Only. But that is just not correct......the following is a wonderful example.
Math 17
10.............Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

We know that Elijah (Elias, spelling difference) did not Literally Come "Erchomai". But in the Spirit, Power, and Mantel of Anointing.......OF...... Elijah, John the Baptist WAS the Chosen Vessel Among the Pots that BECAME the VOICE of God.
There are more examples, but this should be enough, especially since it is Directly Related to the Voice of God in an Earthen Vessel Prior to, and........ During........ Christ's First "Coming/Parousia".

Fifthly, Where the text, according to the King James Version says " When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:", here is the most critical part.
Here, at this point is where the Power, Mantel of Anointing, Presence/Parousia, Voice, Grace, and Glory of the TRUE GOD and His Testimony IN the Saints will be Fulfilled...............At SOME POINT.......DURING the 3.5 Year Great Tribulation.
Antichrist will have come to be Seated AMONG the Saints as a Liar...and Loser.........BUT.......Christ will be SEATED....IN........the Saints..........and the Testimony and Truth of Christ will be Known and VOICED by the Vessels of God, the 144,000 and the Church.
That will be...............A...................Seating of Christ on His throne of Glory......that is to be Revealed IN the Saints IN THAT DAY.
2 thes 1
7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
10 When............. he shall........ come (Echomai/strongs 2064).......... to be.......... GLORIFIED in his SAINTS,.......... and to be admired in all them that believe (because....... our TESTIMONY...... among you was BELEIVED)
IN THAT DAY.

For these reasons and several more that i'll not add here, that it is not a fact and Absolute that I Must understand this Expression and Illustration of the Coming of Christ as Literal.


Is 53
1 Who hath............ BELEIVED our report (TESTIMONY)?............ and to whom is the arm (WORKING/BUILDING) of the LORD revealed?


(because....... our TESTIMONY...... among you was BELEIVED)
IN THAT DAY.
(because....... our TESTIMONY...... among you was BELEIVED)
IN THAT DAY.
(because....... our TESTIMONY...... among you was BELEIVED)
IN THAT DAY.


We ARE the Temple, and ARE BUILT upon the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets....Christ Himself being the Cornerstone OF IT.

How Much Plainer Can it Be Said?

[Exit40]

Luk 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the Kingdom of God is within you.

God Bless

David

[wkc]

So ....ST...you are saying that you don't believe there will be a temple constructed before Christ returns?

[1whowaits]

ST, while i would agree that we are the temple of the Holy Spirit, the temple that we are does not exclude the coexistence of a literal, physical temple on the earth. If that were the case then why build churches and cathedrals, would that not be wrong?

Isa 2 describes 'the house of the God of Jacob' on the mountain of the Lord, the mountain of the Lord's temple, from which He (Jesus) will judge between the nations, during the millennium. It appears that during the millenium Jesus will rule from the temple mount, in God's house, aka the temple, in Jerusalem. As Paul stated in 1 Thess 4 that when we will be caught up to the Lord in the air we will be with the Lord forever, where will we be when Jesus rules from the literal, physical temple in Jerusalem?

It would appear that the temple that we are can coexist with a literal, physical house of the Lord, a literal, physical temple on earth, which is what Jesus rebuilds in Zech 6 during the millennium.

And from the context and description, the future temple described in Rev 11 and 2 Thess 2 is a literal, physical temple, not a group of christian bodies.

[shorttribber]

If that were the case then why build churches and cathedrals, would that not be wrong?

For simply a place to worship, although they are not necessary either. No not at all wrong, but it would be if we were slaying animals for sacrifice in them instead of offering up the Sacrifices of Praise that Are Acceptable.

from which He (Jesus) will judge between the nations, during the millennium.

Does the text state "During the millennium"? No, it doesn't.

It appears that during the millenium Jesus will rule from the temple mount, in God's house, aka the temple, in Jerusalem.

Just errant interpretation, He will Rule from New Jerusalem, when he "Comes" to be Glorified in the Saints....I've explained much of that in more detail in my post above. We Already HAVE COME unto Mt. Zion, and into the company and family of Saints....and Messengers Into that New Jerusalem that is, at present, Unseen.

And from the context and description, the future temple described in Rev 11 and 2 Thess 2 is a literal, physical temple, not a group of christian bodies.

You're just stating the same position again....we just disagree...and I've given you good reason, by the texts, I believe that my reasons are strong for my position and you feel the other way.
But in Revelation 11 you've only made an argument from some something never in the original text, so, it is not proof at all, but is greater evidence for my position.

That's fine....we will all see.

[shorttribber]

So ....ST...you are saying that you don't believe there will be a temple constructed before Christ returns?

Right, no temple....we Are the Temple that Christ Rules from....but His Might and Power will be manifested in a way never seen on earth before during the Final 3.5 Completion of the Confirmation of THE COVENANT.

That's what I believe....I could be wrong...but as I said....we will see.

[wkc]

ST....my position is in agreement with yours for the most part and as you said, we shall soon see.

[shorttribber]

ST....my position is in agreement with yours for the most part and as you said, we shall soon see.

yep

Isa 2 describes 'the house of the God of Jacob' on the mountain of the Lord, the mountain of the Lord's temple, from which He (Jesus) will judge between the nations, during the millennium. It appears that during the millenium Jesus will rule from the temple mount, in God's house, aka the temple, in Jerusalem.

Here is something I recommend for everyone who believes as you do 1WW. As uneasy as you may feel doing it (because reading the prophecies with a spiritualizing of the text is almost a forbidden exercise) just try to make your best attempt to do so.
Now, I'm not trying to be speak poorly of those who hold strongly to the literal meaning of the texts of prophecy by saying it is "almost a forbidden exercise". Please, if any are bothered by that remark, I only mean it with respect and love to you for your very sincere desire that God's Word be not bent or stretched beyond it's true meaning by not holding fast, as much as possible, to the literal meaning.

If, 1WW, you've already read an exposition explaining in detail the entire chapter of Isaiah 2 from a spiritual fulfillment perspective then please let me know, and I will not make any great attempt at it here, because I would be happy to share my position on it.

One thing I will ask though 1WW, does not the Order of the Events mentioned in the entire chapter from beginning till the end seem curious from your perspective?

And I will add this, it is in Perfect Sequential Order when the entire chapter is understood using my perspective.........that IS important I think.

[WilliamL]

1Whowaits wrote: William… I see you refer to yourself in the 3rd person in your answers, and you write in a certain style typical of a previous poster who went by a different name, what name did you go by before?

My reply: And so your spirit devolves to innuendo and slander.

Paul writes, 1 Tim. 5:19-20: “Against an elder receive not an accusation, but upon two or three witnesses. Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.”

Am I a two-faced deceiver, posting by different names? What I am is a senior teaching elder in my local fellowship, having studied the Bible for over 50 years. Your unsupported accusation against this elder is baseless and false: I've used only one name on FP. Ever.
This accusation is an example of your overactive imagination. You post unsupported or poorly-supported speculations. Many holes have been poked in your speculations, but your plow right along with more.
Jesus said, Matt. 15:14: “Let them: they are blind leaders of the blind.” Following His teaching, I will leave off further response.

[mark s]

Either . . .

A prophecy is meant to be understood in a literal way, in the overt message expressed, such as, "He will sit on His throne", meaning, there is a certain chair that he will sit on,

or . . .

a prophecy is meant to be understood in a symbolic way, in a covert message, understood by interposing alternative meanings for the normal meanings of the words used, such as, "the throne is not a chair, but signifies an established authority, and to sit does not refer to a position of physical repose, but signifies a person's established place in that designated authority.

Something like that.

Here's my issue. Either our interpretations are Scripturally authoritative, or they are not.

When I read prophecies, it seems to me that some are specified as symbols, and some are not. An example of a symbol given in a prophecy is Ezekiel laying on his side, a day for a year, John, "I saw a great sign in heaven . . .". These are not only named as symbolic, but the symbol is defined for us. John saw "another great sign", a red dragon. The Bible tells us that this dragon is Satan, the devil, that ancient serpent. We have solid Scriptural authority for not only identifying this as symbolic, but also what the symbol mean.

Without that, we would not have Scriptural authority.

If a prophecy is given as a simple narrative of simple events, such as Jesus ruling the world from a temple in Jerusalem, where he sits on a throne, what is our Scriptural authority to identify these elements as symbols, and what is our authority to say what these symbols mean?

The example is given that Jesus will build His church, and that that the church is God's living temple, therefore, there will be no physical temple. In a logical argument, this is non sequitor. Where is the rule that there cannot be both a living temple and a physical temple?

I would have to ask, what was the physical temple? Was it not a place where God was? Was it not decreed by God? And could there not be another temple decreed by God?

Before accepting a simple narrative prophecy as other than a simple narrative prophecy, I personally need to see where the Bible tells me that the particular passage is symbolic, metaphorical, allegorical, parable, or what ever else it might by. And then I need to see where the Bible defines the symbols. Without these foundations, the interpretation is not Scripturally authoritative.

If we are free to declare that passages are meant to be understood in some spiritual sense, but not for what they say in their plain direct sense, then how do we know where to stop? And who says what everything means?

Do you see my point?

Love in Christ,
Mark

[mark s]

There were various sorts of sacrifices, not all for atonement of sin.

What do you feel about one that Is described as Atonement for Sin in Ezekiel ?

I think that the temple commanded in Ezekiel was to be built by the captives returned from Babylon. I think it's in chapter 43 that it says this. They did not return and build it, and therefore remained in disobedience, incurring the 7-times over punishment, leading to their not having national sovereignty until 1948.

It would have been a place where the sin offering was given until Jesus died.

Love in Christ,
Mark

[shorttribber]

There were various sorts of sacrifices, not all for atonement of sin.

What do you feel about one that Is described as Atonement for Sin in Ezekiel ?

I think that the temple commanded in Ezekiel was to be built by the captives returned from Babylon. I think it's in chapter 43 that it says this. They did not return and build it, and therefore remained in disobedience, incurring the 7-times over punishment, leading to their not having national sovereignty until 1948.

It would have been a place where the sin offering was given until Jesus died.

Love in Christ,
Mark

Then your position would be that the Ezekiel temple is not the millennial temple that so many expect? Am I understanding that portion correctly?

[shorttribber]

Where is the rule that there cannot be both a living temple and a physical temple?

One rule might well be that the Text says "he sits in or (Among)......THE.....temple Of God"

He does not say....A....Temple of God, thereby indicating MORE than One.

That idea just came to me a few seconds ago, so I thought it good to post it.

[WilliamL]

Mark sez, "Do you see my point?"

Loud and clear. And I agree. Except. In Revelation, the darn narrative from chapters 4-19 keeps bouncing back and forth between the heavenly and the earthly -- 7 bounces, according to one author I read -- which does leave open to debate which part is symbolic, and which is literal.
Now, take those nasty locusts and horsemen in chapter 9, for example: they are "upon the earth." I take them to be absolutely literal. Most commentaries, I believe, would disagree, making them out to be John's rather poor attempt to describe modern human military weaponry: Cobra helicopters and the like. What do you say?

As for the "temple"/naos, which is mentioned 16 times in Revelation:
10 of them directly speak of it being "in heaven," or are linked to a near verse that does: 11:19x2; 14:15, 17; 15:5, 6, 8x2; 16:1; 16:17 ;
2 of them refer to it being the Holy One Himself: Rev. 21:22x2 ;
2 more of them, 3:12 and 7:15, also are clearly heavenly, but you can check them out for yourself to decide ;
leaving only the 2 verses of Rev. 11:1, 2, which I'm convinced also refer to the heavenly sanctuary.
NOT A SINGLE VERSE IN REVELATION speaks of "the Temple/naos on earth," or "in Jerusalem/the holy city/etc." Therefore, there is no good reason, I believe, to make an exception for Rev. 11:1-2; especially since 11:19 says "the naos in heaven."

[shorttribber]

Hi Mark,
What period would you say this applies, the millennium or now.

Is. 56


1 Thus saith the LORD, Keep ye judgment, and do justice: for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.
2 Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it; that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil.
3 Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the LORD, speak, saying, The LORD hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.
4 For thus saith the LORD unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;
5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.
6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;
7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.
8 The Lord GOD which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, beside those that are gathered unto him.
9 All ye beasts of the field, come to devour, yea, all ye beasts in the forest.
10 His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber.

11 Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter.

12 Come ye, say they, I will fetch wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink; and to morrow shall be as this day, and much more abundant.

[mark s]

Then your position would be that the Ezekiel temple is not the millennial temple that so many expect? Am I understanding that portion correctly?

Hi ST,

Here's the passage:

While the man was standing beside me, I heard one speaking to me out of the temple, and he said to me, “Son of man, this is the place of my throne and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the people of Israel forever. And the house of Israel shall no more defile my holy name, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoring and by the dead bodies of their kings at their high places, by setting their threshold by my threshold and their doorposts beside my doorposts, with only a wall between me and them. They have defiled my holy name by their abominations that they have committed, so I have consumed them in my anger. Now let them put away their whoring and the dead bodies of their kings far from me, and I will dwell in their midst forever.

“As for you, son of man, describe to the house of Israel the temple, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities; and they shall measure the plan. And if they are ashamed of all that they have done, make known to them the design of the temple, its arrangement, its exits and its entrances, that is, its whole design; and make known to them as well all its statutes and its whole design and all its laws, and write it down in their sight, so that they may observe all its laws and all its statutes and carry them out.

(Ezekiel 43:6-11 ESV)

These were God's instructions to the Israelites to be done upon the completion of the Babylonian captivity. Whether or not this describes a temple that will yet be built I don't know. I believe the primary application of this portion of Scripture was to the Israelites in that day.

But this is why, I think, that these instructions include sin offerings.

Love in Christ,
Mark

[mark s]

Mark sez, "Do you see my point?"

Loud and clear. And I agree. Except. In Revelation, the darn narrative from chapters 4-19 keeps bouncing back and forth between the heavenly and the earthly -- 7 bounces, according to one author I read -- which does leave open to debate which part is symbolic, and which is literal.

Hi William,

I think we can follow the text, and that it tells us these things. And does it mean that something must be symbolic simply because it is seen in the heavenly realm?

I think a real angel will cast a real censor to the earth, for instance. Maybe I'm not understanding your meaning, and it may be better to discuss specific verses.

Now, take those nasty locusts and horsemen in chapter 9, for example: they are "upon the earth." I take them to be absolutely literal. Most commentaries, I believe, would disagree, making them out to be John's rather poor attempt to describe modern human military weaponry: Cobra helicopters and the like. What do you say?

I don't think of helicopters and tanks when I read those verses. These seem like very strange beings, I suppose supernatural beings, entering into the earthly realm. I think each of the three woes are the same in this way, the third one being Satan himself cast to the earth.

As for the "temple"/naos, which is mentioned 16 times in Revelation:
10 of them directly speak of it being "in heaven," or are linked to a near verse that does: 11:19x2; 14:15, 17; 15:5, 6, 8x2; 16:1; 16:17 ;
2 of them refer to it being the Holy One Himself: Rev. 21:22x2 ;
2 more of them, 3:12 and 7:15, also are clearly heavenly, but you can check them out for yourself to decide ;
leaving only the 2 verses of Rev. 11:1, 2, which I'm convinced also refer to the heavenly sanctuary.
NOT A SINGLE VERSE IN REVELATION speaks of "the Temple/naos on earth," or "in Jerusalem/the holy city/etc." Therefore, there is no good reason, I believe, to make an exception for Rev. 11:1-2; especially since 11:19 says "the naos in heaven."

I think your arguments are good, and I like the way you approach this. I have a problem with "don't measure the outer court, as it is given over to the gentiles". Could that be the case in heaven? The two witnesses prophesy on earth, would you agree? If so, the context could be seen as continuing in an earth view. But how do we have Jews and Gentiles, or "nations" in heaven, where part of the holy precinct is given over to them, and not counted with the rest?

Also, if the temple in the first part of ch. 11 is assumed to be heavenly, why the need to specify an heavenly temple at the end of the chapter? Could I not argue that as the vs. 19 temple is specified as heavenly that this is to clarify that it's not the same temple in which part is given to the nations?

I'd have to say it remains open for debate, myself. On the one hand, I agree with you that this reference does not specify, and that the others are clearly heavenly, so this is a good indication that all references could be heavenly, however, these questions remain.

Love in Christ,
Mark

[mark s]

Hi Mark,
What period would you say this applies, the millennium or now.

Is. 56


1 Thus saith the LORD, Keep ye judgment, and do justice: for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.
2 Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it; that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil.
3 Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the LORD, speak, saying, The LORD hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.
4 For thus saith the LORD unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;
5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.
6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;
7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.
8 The Lord GOD which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, beside those that are gathered unto him.
9 All ye beasts of the field, come to devour, yea, all ye beasts in the forest.
10 His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber.

11 Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter.

12 Come ye, say they, I will fetch wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink; and to morrow shall be as this day, and much more abundant.

Hi ST,

I'd have to go back and read the chapter, which I don't have time for right now, but isn't there a 3rd option? Could this apply to the time of the prophet?

As God is calling them towards keeping the Law, I'd be inclined to think it was then.

Love in Christ,
Mark

[shorttribber]

I'd have to go back and read the chapter, which I don't have time for right now, but isn't there a 3rd option? Could this apply to the time of the prophet?As God is calling them towards keeping the Law, I'd be inclined to think it was then.

Do you think it interesting that Jesus quoted from this part while reproving the money changers in the temple in Jerusalem?
7. Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

And then Right After That, he says to them that "Your House is Left unto you Desolate".

But " mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people."

A house built of Living Stones. Where the Sacrifice of Praise is offered upon an Alter that Carnal Priests can not Participate/Have Communion.

Heb 13
10 We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle.
11 For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.
12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.
13 Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach.

14 For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come,
15 By him........ therefore........ let us offer .......the sacrifice of praise..... to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name.
16 But to do good and to communicate forget not: for with ......such sacrifices..... God is well pleased.

Either our interpretations are Scripturally authoritative, or they are not.

And then I need to see where the Bible defines the symbols. Without these foundations, the interpretation is not Scripturally authoritative.

Eph 2
14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath..................... broken down the middle wall............... of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Ezk 43
7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places.
8 In their setting of their threshold by my thresholds, and their post by my posts, ....and .......the wall........ between me and them,......................... they have even defiled my holy name by their abominations that they have committed: wherefore I have consumed them in mine anger.

There is a great deal of Scriptural Authority to Understand the Spirit of these Prophetic Reports.

you may disagree, but this is only a Very Miniscule sampling.

[shorttribber]

Either . . .
A prophecy is meant to be understood in a literal way, in the overt message expressed, such as, "He will sit on His throne", meaning, there is a certain chair that he will sit on,
or . . .
a prophecy is meant to be understood in a symbolic way, in a covert message, understood by interposing alternative meanings for the normal meanings of the words used, such as, "the throne is not a chair, but signifies an established authority, and to sit does not refer to a position of physical repose, but signifies a person's established place in that designated authority.
Something like that.

More-less that's true, but not in Every case, there could be a literal and spiritual blending of sorts....such as your position in Math 25, the sheep and goat judgment of nations. It's unavoidable that a blend be understood to arrive at your understanding of the text.
On the other hand , I see it as entirely a Spiritual representation of Christ's second Parousia and a separation of the rebellious from the faithful.

Now, i would like to admit as evidence to all reasonable judges, this following text.....

Is 66


1 Thus saith the LORD, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? and where is the place of my rest?
2 For all those things hath mine hand made, and all those things have been, saith the LORD: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word.
3 He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations...................(skipping several verses) ......................18 For I know their works and their thoughts: it shall come, that I will gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come, and see my glory.

"The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? and where is the place of my rest?........... it shall come, that I will gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come, and see my glory."

I made the following comment mark, in another place......
"That separation of the sheep and goats will occur during the great trib. IMO.
I can not , in the Literal sense, imagine All nations Before His throne, Divided straight down the Middle, with some groups of nations on His Right and Some groups of nations on his Left.
I mean, where in the Middle East will we find such an arrangement according to Prophecy elsewhere written where such a grouping of nations Literally take place?"

And you gave the following answer.........

Joel 3.

Then i made my comment about Joel 3.....but could you include Isaiah 66 as proof of THIS Gathering of nations also?
" it shall come, that I will gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come, and see my glory." (Is 66)
You may say no....but i say yes....it should be included Together......BECAUSE of this Following text that Ties them both Together....

2 thes 1
..................................7 And to you who are troubled rest with us,...........................................
(and where is the place of my rest?) from Isaiah 66;1 above.
................when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,........................
(When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory)from Math. 25
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
(13 Put ye in the sickle, for the harvest is ripe: come, get you down; for the press is full, the fats overflow; for their wickedness is great.14 Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision: for the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision.) from Joel 3
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

10 When............. he shall........ come (Echomai/strongs 2064).......... to be.......... GLORIFIED in his SAINTS,..........
(The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me?) from above , Is 66:1
(When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory) Math 25

and to be admired in all them that believe (because....... our testimony...... among you was BELEIVED)
IN THAT DAY.

I Believe it! And the Testimony of the Saints of God in Christ is very near.

1Cor 1
6 Even as the Testimony of Christ was Confirmed in you:
7 So that ye........... come behind in no gift;........... waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:
8 Who shall also Confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

[mark s]

I'd have to go back and read the chapter, which I don't have time for right now, but isn't there a 3rd option? Could this apply to the time of the prophet?As God is calling them towards keeping the Law, I'd be inclined to think it was then.

Do you think it interesting that Jesus quoted from this part while reproving the money changers in the temple in Jerusalem?
7. Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

And then Right After That, he says to them that "Your House is Left unto you Desolate".

But " mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people."

A house built of Living Stones. Where the Sacrifice of Praise is offered upon an Alter that Carnal Priests can not Participate/Have Communion.

Hi ST,

I don't see where both of these could not be speaking of a physical house. Their temple will be destroyed, the future temple will be one where people will gather from all nations to talk to God.

Either our interpretations are Scripturally authoritative, or they are not.

And then I need to see where the Bible defines the symbols. Without these foundations, the interpretation is not Scripturally authoritative.

Eph 2
14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath..................... broken down the middle wall............... of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Ezk 43
7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places.
8 In their setting of their threshold by my thresholds, and their post by my posts, ....and .......the wall........ between me and them,......................... they have even defiled my holy name by their abominations that they have committed: wherefore I have consumed them in mine anger.

There is a great deal of Scriptural Authority to Understand the Spirit of these Prophetic Reports.

you may disagree, but this is only a Very Miniscule sampling.

That the Bible speaks of a spiritual temple, again, does not mean that there cannot be a physical temple also. Does it?

Love in Christ,
Mark

[mark s]

Either . . .
A prophecy is meant to be understood in a literal way, in the overt message expressed, such as, "He will sit on His throne", meaning, there is a certain chair that he will sit on,
or . . .
a prophecy is meant to be understood in a symbolic way, in a covert message, understood by interposing alternative meanings for the normal meanings of the words used, such as, "the throne is not a chair, but signifies an established authority, and to sit does not refer to a position of physical repose, but signifies a person's established place in that designated authority.
Something like that.

More-less that's true, but not in Every case, there could be a literal and spiritual blending of sorts....such as your position in Math 25, the sheep and goat judgment of nations. It's unavoidable that a blend be understood to arrive at your understanding of the text.

How is that?

Jesus says the gathering will be of the nations, and that they will be separated like a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. So Jesus introduces a simile. Then He defines the simile, with the sheep being the righteous, and the goats the wicked.

This is a perfect example of my view. The symbol is stated as such, and then defined for us. No ambiguity, and full Scriptural authority.

I think the simple reality is that you and I view Scripture very differently. If it's given as a simple narrative of straightforward events, and there are no statements that it's not, that's how I take it.

RE Isaiah 66, I'd need to look at the context, and read the chapter, which I don't really have time for at the moment.

But to stay with Matthew 25, I would assert that the only reason you understand it to be a parable, or not really the way it's given, is that you cannot imagine a place where it could happen, and that it doesn't fit with your understandings from other passages. Please correct me if I misunderstand you.

I think we need to simply stay with the way the passages present themselves.

Consider . . .

If there are about 7 billion people on the world now . . . The 4th seal causes death on 1/4 of the world. Let's use the standard formula, and figure 25% dead. Now the earth has 5 1/4 billion. The 6th trumpet kills 1/3. Now the earth has 3.5 billion. Let's say that the earthquakes, hail, wars, bad water, all that stuff, kills another 25% of the original. Personally, I expect the number will be a lot higher. That gives an estimated 1.75 billion survivors.

So how much room would they require? How much space do you need? I can fit in a 2ft by 1ft rectangle. Let's say some are larger, some are smaller, and on average allow 2 x 2 feet, or 4 square feet.

1.75 billion people, with 4 square feet each, is 7 billion square feet, or about 250 square miles. A 10 mile by 25 mile piece of ground would do. That's less than twice the area of the Gaza Strip, for instance.

I think we can take it literally.

Love in Christ,
Mark

[WilliamL]

William: As for the "temple"/naos, which is mentioned 16 times in Revelation:
10 of them directly speak of it being "in heaven," or are linked to a near verse that does: 11:19x2; 14:15, 17; 15:5, 6, 8x2; 16:1; 16:17 ;
2 of them refer to it being the Holy One Himself: Rev. 21:22x2 ;
2 more of them, 3:12 and 7:15, also are clearly heavenly, but you can check them out for yourself to decide ;
leaving only the 2 verses of Rev. 11:1, 2, which I'm convinced also refer to the heavenly sanctuary.
NOT A SINGLE VERSE IN REVELATION speaks of "the Temple/naos on earth," or "in Jerusalem/the holy city/etc." Therefore, there is no good reason, I believe, to make an exception for Rev. 11:1-2; especially since 11:19 says "the naos in heaven."

Mark: ...I have a problem with "don't measure the outer court, as it is given over to the gentiles". Could that be the case in heaven?
Reply: Let's read it literally. "And the court the external [G1855 exothen] of the temple expel [G1544 ekballo, from G1537 ek/out (of) + G906 ballo/throw] outside [G1544 exo]". So, the exterior court of God's Temple is to be cast out outside -- outside of what? Outside of heaven is the reasonable answer. After all, the Court of the Gentiles in OT days was the place where unsanctified/uncircumcised Gentiles were allowed, but no closer. In heaven, no unsanctified souls will be allowed at all.
The same word ekballo was used to describe the event when Jesus "CAST OUT all them that sold and bought in the temple, Matt. 21:12: it indicates a violent expulsion.

Mark: The two witnesses prophesy on earth, would you agree?
Reply: Absolutely. The passage shifts in verse 2 from the heavenly to the earthly perspective.

Mark: If so, the context could be seen as continuing in an earth view. But how do we have Jews and Gentiles, or "nations" in heaven, where part of the holy precinct is given over to them, and not counted with the rest?
Answer: Unclear as to your question; Jews aren't mentioned in Rev. 11. But consider this passage, whether it may be similar to the heavenly scene we're considering:
Mt 22:11-13 And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment: And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless. Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him [Gr. ekbalete] into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
So, there will clearly be some weeding out of those who somehow ascended but didn't belong.

Mark: Also, if the temple in the first part of ch. 11 is assumed to be heavenly, why the need to specify an heavenly temple at the end of the chapter? Could I not argue that as the vs. 19 temple is specified as heavenly that this is to clarify that it's not the same temple in which part is given to the nations?
Answer: There doesn't seem to be any pattern to when "in heaven" is used and when it isn't. When Jesus said, "Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out," Rev. 3:12, he didn't specify "in heaven," but in the context that is what we assume.